RIGHT TO LEAKAGE

BY JYOTI MUKUL

It may not be anybody’s case to hide information these days. Many make business out of information and interpretation of information is even bigger business. Naturally, just like any product that carries a value, the tendency of those who have the information is to hoard it especially if the release of information could work to someone’s disadvantage. Those with firsthand experience of corporate rivalry and diplomatic manoeuvring probably realise the importance of information even more than media. Often media is just a conduit to reach the larger audience and cause a larger impact. No wonder, leakage of information and reports have been at the centre of upheavals globally as well as in India since last year. Leakage of information has assumed such importance that findings of an auditor report take a backseat to the question of how did the cat get out of the bag. So we have the Comptroller and Auditor General writing to the Prime Minister an elaborate letter dwelling on the embarrassment caused due to the leakage without really thinking twice about why should it matter whether the report is out even before it was suppose to be? And lo and behold, the letter too gets leaked. It took years for the country to realise the need for a Right to Information Act. The use or misuse of this right is a subject of much debate in government offices, but the dangers of not knowing far outweigh the dangers of knowing or not knowing fully. Keeping away information probably gives its officers a sense of power. In fact, from a government perspective, most of the things that it announces “formally” have already been in public domain. Take the case of recent Budget. The decision to increase excise and service tax and many other proposals were already known. Someone somewhere didn’t give a damn about secrecy. The only person in recent days who seems to have held on to the oath of secrecy is Dinesh Trivedi. He kept away probably the biggest decision of his life from his “leader” Mamata Banerjee, who asserted her right to know as a coalition partner. In the end, Trivedi lost his job, Banerjee her credibility and the Railway Budget its relevance. Sometimes, the plea for not revealing information is that it is in formative stage—a proposal and not a decision, an idea so delicate that if revealed can be lost completely. While that may be true, why should any proposal that matures to change the course for some people or company should not be discussed? Revealing information is all about exposing it to public debate. And in hiding it, the only intention is to quell protest and prevent lobbying. But if a decision or a decision maker succumbs to criticism and lobbyists then obviously the fault lies not in the revelation but in the system’s resilience. Such a system that does not live the test of criticism needs further strengthening and so, hail the Right to Leakage and down with iron curtains.